Talk:Baptists in the history of separation of church and state

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophy of religion

Christianity: Baptist Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Baptist work group (assessed as Top-importance).

Comments

does this really need its own article? i think perhaps it should be merged back.

This section was moved here because the main article was reaching its size limit. Rohirok 21:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot see what the present constitution of the UK has to do with this history, and anyhow Scotland has a state church. Furthermore, I don't think that everyone quoted here is Baptist. This needs a major rewrite or removal IMO. Any views anyone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.109.165.91 (talk) 16:34, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is entitled history, but mostly deals with the current status of Baptist opinion. I just added requests for citation from February 2010, but this article has been lacking citations since May 2007. Also, skimming the citations, there were links to a wordpress.com blog. Somehow, any wordpress.com blog, no matter how insightful, does not seem to meet the requirements for publications. I would take another stab at cleaning this article up right now, but I actually came to this article to learn, not do lots of edits and research. This seems like a candidate for deletion. What little factual information is backed up by citations could be added to other artilcles dealing with Baptists or the separation of church and state. –JazzyGroove (talk) 03:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Contemporary Views

Why are James Dobson and Francis Schaeffer mentioned in the "contemporary views" section? Neither of them are Baptists. (Schaeffer was Presbyterian and Dobson is a Nazarene.) Mhick (talk) 16:07, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the disputed paragraph here. They are not shown to be Baptists and thus relevant.

David A. Noebel, J.F. Baldwin and Kevin Bywater, in their 2002 book Clergy in the Classroom: The Religion of Secular Humanism view the state as giving support to secular humanism, as "de facto the established religion of our land," particularly in government-run public schools.^[1] James C. Dobson asserts that American culture has shifted from "its Christian underpinnings" toward secular humanism (among other religious and philosophical viewpoints).^[2] Also, Francis A. Schaeffer calls for Christians to "let go of fear and a false concept of spirituality to stand against the tyranny and moral chaos that has resulted from the cultural shift away from Judeo‐Christian thought to secular humanism."^[3] Some argue in favor of organized Christian prayer and Bible reading in the public schools during regular school hours, which federal courts have generally restricted to voluntary groups outside the purview of state-supported educators acting in their professional roles.

Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:14, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Baptists in the history of separation of church and state. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101010194705/http://www.publicreligion.org:80/objects/uploads/fck/file/AVS%202010%20Report%20FINAL.pdf to http://www.publicreligion.org/objects/uploads/fck/file/AVS%202010%20Report%20FINAL.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:36, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Separation of church and state

This is a misinterpretation of a letter by Thomas Jefferson. I does NOT mean that there should be a "WALL of separation of church and state," in the sense that religion and our government are two separate entities at all. People try to read it incorrectly into the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which in fact reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Translation into modern day English: Dear Danbury Baptists, our new government won't step on you, tell you what to say, or when to say it, and if you have a beef with us, you can bring it to us, and we can sit down and talk about it instead of us having a king or queen who is going to just tell you what to say and think!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C584:5970:34DC:31D5:15F8:908C (talk) 02:43, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [1]

[2] [2]

[3] y.org

[1]

[2]

[3]